Organizational Culture

SPCH 3309

Chapter 8

Overview:

The concept of organizational culture is examined from different perspectives: Functional,Interpretive, and Critically. Each has advantages and disadvantages. Functional looks at culture as a variable that can be manipulated by managers to create a strong and vibrant culture. Interpretive examines culture more from the shared symbols created by all members of the organization that can be evaluated and understood. And the critical perspective looks at cultures with a skeptical eye and tries to change and improve upon where needed.

Culture Defined: “Refers to all the accepted and patterned ways of behavior of a given people.” Organizations are like a min-society, they have their own distinctive patterns of behavior. The longer you are around a company, the more you will begin seeing this behavior emerge. This is, in effect, the organization’s personality that is made up of several key elements noted below:

Elements of Organizational Culture—

  1. Metaphors—This language device can serve to create vivid and memorable pictures in our head. When used well it causes us to see the usual in unusual ways and therefore imprints the ideas in a deeper and sometimes more meaningful way. We use military and sports language frequently in our culture. And these terms along with others can be used in the workplace to describe the environment.
  2. Rituals—practices that are performed regularly and with some specific purpose in mind. May be individual actions, department actions, or organizational actions. For example, one department may have a tradition of holiday parties, Friday afternoon Happy Hours, or any number of specific behaviors that help define who this group is and what they stand for.
  3. Stories—Storytelling are “important indicators of the values the participants share….” Hearing the stories of those who have come before and how those behaviors helped shape the company are good ways to integrate people into an organization.
  4. Heroes—Oftentimes the stories are told about the heroes of the company. The organizational members who have taken great strides and performed at the highest levels that made the company what it is today.
  5. Cultural Artifacts—Tangible/Physical features of the company; ranging from colors, to design, to artwork, to physical symbols, etc; all contributing to shaping the personality and attitude of the company.
  6. Performances—how the members of the company interact with each other; learning the rules on talking with bosses, with co-workers, when to use humor or not; how laid-back versus how structured and strict in communication style.
  7. Values—This is often linked the company’s mission statement; what the organization stands for and the behaviors expected to perform. The values typically flow downward from the President or CEO and permeate throughout the organization. Must practice externally what is preached internally.

Strategies for Building Strong Cultures

Two critical positives for having a strong and pronounced corporate culture is that your company tends to be more competitive in the marketplace and leads to increased employee satisfaction and consequently a lower turn-over rate. The Deal and Kennedy book “Corporate Cultures: The Rites and Rituals of Corporate Life” outlines the keys in their mind—enhancing the business environment, stressing and living up to the company values, recognizing its heroes, and practicing the corporate rites and rituals. Like Deal and Kennedy, the Peters and Waterman book “In Search of Excellence: Lessons from America’s Best Run Companies” argues that managers are capable of using communication to shape and form an organization’s culture.

The Functionalist Approach to Organizational Culture

  • A long and rich tradition of seeing organizational culture via this perspective; still the dominate point of view
  • A linear view; mechanistic in concept
  • Treats communication as a variable that can be used or manipulated by management to shape and build culture
  • The assumption is that managers can control culture by the way they use communication and thus influence organizational performance.
  • Characterized by a strong culture of organizational consensus, consistency, and clarity where “members share the same values and understandings…”
  • A strong culture is presumed to an effective means of control.
  • When members develop a strong emotional attachment to their culture and internalize the organization’s values, formal control strategies are not needed as much; they become less effective; less necessary.
  • The critics of this approach say it is too managerial biased and that culture is too complex to be manipulated in this manner; cannot be imposed from the top-down to employees. And hat this perspective fails to see the organization in a holistic or total sense
  • In sum: The manager must focus on the human side of organizational life—its mythology, its heroes, values, stories, rites, rituals, etc. In so doing, they can affect change and increase organizational performance in the process.

The Interpretative Approach to Organizational Culture

  • This approach is less concerned with managers but more focused on the complex process of organizational life.
  • All members—not just managers—are thought to create and shape the organization’s culture through everyday communication practices.
  • Centers on the processes through which organizational members makes sense or create their experiences. Rituals, myths, jokes, and other cultural performances are not viewed as static entities to be transmitted from management to employees.
  • Culture is not merely another variable that the organization has, rather, culture is something the organization is.
  • Interpretive view is not anti-management, but rather see the organization from multiple levels and each level having influence on the organization’s culture. Provides a more in-depth understanding of corporate life that does the functionalist approach.
  • The critics of this approach say this is a bit politically naïve about people and how they (and the powers they use) behave in organizations. And while this approach gives a richer look at the organization as a complex entity, it does not offer guidelines or prescriptions for organizations to employ to strengthen the culture.
The Critical Approach to Organizational Culture
  • Extends the research of the Interpretative Approach into the realm of the critique and evaluation.
  • This approach evaluates existing cultures; calls into question the ideologies and power structures that underscore organizational cultures.
  • This approach is grounded in the goal of freeing people from dominance and oppression.
  • This tries to look at the “dark side” of otherwise excellent corporate cultures, and suggests that managers need to be on guard and watch for abuses of corporations

How to Bring Out the Best in Your Organization:

The 7 Orpheus Principles In Creating Culture

  1. Put power in the hands of the people doing the work.

The concept of empowerment is popular but seldom actually practiced in business. Many employees say managers claim to empower them, but few actually see such evidence. But without empowerment we risk lower morale, reduced retention rates, and opportunities lost for the organization. (Ex: Target department stores have empowered checkout clerks to make decisions on unmarked products. And J.P. Morgan empowers their employees to make decisions for customers with its flat organization hierarchy.)

Ideally, employees should be able to participate in setting work schedules and their work environment, budget issues, hiring and firing, etc. Not to replace managers but to make valued contributions to the overall effort.

Another goal is to draw out leadership in all members. De-centralized power into the hands of the individual takes careful coordination but people become more passionate and fight harder for ideas and goals they are responsible for. Organizations must foster the right climate or culture to create such empowerment. Managers and workers need to interact in many settings (inside and outside of work). All employees need to be encouraged to make decisions (based on their level of expertise).

Managers must delegate authority; not just the responsibility for the results; which leads to frustration. Managers must not micro-manage; hire good people; train them and then get out of their way. Ensure regular feedback channels are in place (meetings, calls, etc.) for employees to report status back to managers.

Be patient…trying to change a culture rooted in the old ways takes time and some employees find it difficult. Employees are equally responsible for their role; they must be professional and committed to their job or this will fail.

  1. Encourage individual responsibility.

Individual responsibility for an organization’s products or services allow the company to succeed in meeting their goals. When employees have no involvement in setting a plan or goals, they are less likely to feel a sense of commitment in reaching it. When no ownership is felt, commitment is harder to attain. You will always find some employees (estimated to be 15-25% of them) who do not want more responsibility and often resist being held accountable for their behavior.

The book “First, Break All the Rules: What the World’s Greatest Managers do Differently,” argues that employees must be encouraged to take individual responsibility by defining the “right” outcomes and then letting them find their own path or route to reaching that outcome. That includes going beyond their own areas of expertise if they have ideas. For example, in traditional hierarchies employees often feel restrained from sharing innovative ideas that reach beyond their primary responsibilities. When employees know they won’t be punished or blamed for making an honest mistake (the finger-pointing situation),they are more apt to be creative and be willing to accept responsibility. In effect, companies sometimes need to look at unconventional solutions to old problems. When we feel safe in proposing such solutions, the company as a whole benefits. When employees feel a sense of ownership (either psychological or financial) the company is less likely to go bankrupt. The Brookings Institute reported that companies with strong employee stock ownership are more likely to stay financially healthy than those with little to none.

The ability to build and maintain trust is derived directly from the firm’s culture of excellence, values, and individual responsibility. Companies need to hire the brightest and best workers but also create a work environment that will allow them to flourish and be as productive as they can be. Managers cannot force employees to want responsibility. But good people in a positive environment with good products or services will embrace this philosophy.

The five steps to foster this responsibility are:

(1)Give employees the leeway to define what the “right” outcome is.

(2)Give employees a sense of ownership.

(3) Expect workers to make their own decisions and to be accountable for them. Accountability leads to quality.

(4) Instill a sense of pride in the job.

(5) Reward employees who take responsibility for product and quality. But there are landmines or traps to avoid.

What to watch out for:

  • managers who take all the credit and dish out all the blame. (they dislike the team concept).
  • Failing to hold people accountable for their actions (this leads to mediocrity, at best).
  • Employees who won’t take or accept responsibility (complacency is not an option that companies can afford if they are to survive).
  1. Create clarity of roles.

The recent trend toward “flat” management hierarchies and self-managed teamwork in many companies have undermined the traditional clarity concerning the relationship between roles and tasks. To remain effective and competitive, companies have no choice but to create clear roles for their employees. Too many companies fail to address this and let employee roles become blurred or ambiguous to them.

But a clarity of roles can be very positive; leading to such benefits as increased levels of personal responsibility, greater efficiency, improved morale, and increased satisfaction and loyalty to the company. A good idea to put roles in writing and review them with the employee. They should be reviewed periodically and updated as the need dictates. Example: the Ritz-Carlton Hotel Company has made a concerted effort to do this with employee roles. They give employees clearly defined and specialized duties/projects. And each one is linked to the hotel’s overall goal of improving service. Each employee is also given the role of responding to specific customer needs and solving their problems as they arise. And each worker is allowed to plan their own work—this keeps morale high and reduces turn-over (very high for that type of industry). And bottom line is increased company performance levels. It will take any organization time and effort to truly clarify employee roles. Plus, management and employees must have the authority to evaluate people, positions, and projects as need be.

Five steps for creating clarity in roles are:

(1)Develop written descriptions that explain such things as the purpose for the work, why it is important, how quality work is defined, etc.

(2)Clarify informal job responsibilities; those expected duties that go beyond what is clearly necessary or formal for the position.

(3)Constantly assess individual performance; whether it be semi-annual or annual. A good idea to consider peer reviews as well as just management evaluations.

(4)Publicize job responsibilities widely. Everyone needs to be clear about who is responsible for what in the organization.

(5)Encourage employees to learn new roles and responsibilities (and put them in writing).

While there are steps for success, watch out for these landmines:

  • Job descriptions that are ambiguous, ignored, or don’t exist at. Fuzzy roles lead to fuzzy success.
  • Excessive role overlap; two people doing basically the same thing.
  • Indefinite points of contact with customers and clients. Employees need to have clear titles that make sense to customers, and make sure those who deal with your company have easy access to the necessary people.
  • Unrealistic expectations on the part of managers. Expect the best from employees but don’t expect the impossible and don’t expect them to read your mind.
  1. Share and rotate leadership

Sharing leadership can fuel employee motivation, leading to improved productivity and organizational effectiveness. Research shows that is widespread dissatisfaction among employees; 45% feel their bosses had questionable leadership abilities. And almost as many felt that bosses had

"ego problems." Those employees said their bosses seemed to feel threatened and defensive around talented employees.

The traditional way of managing tends to perpetuate this problem. But when different people can share or participate in the leadership process the benefits can be such as (a) people's talents emerging that the company didn't know about; (b) higher levels of employee commitment from feeling more involved; (c) wider range of perspectives for problem-solving; and (d) an overall increase in employee excitement about their jobs.

But this shared leadership concept can only work if those leading have certain qualities. Specifically:

  • Balance--being able to shift between advancing a point of view and asking others for theirs; knowing how to balance advocacy with facilitation.
  • Fairness--openness to other ideas and willingness to suspend criticism until the ideas have been presented; creating an atmosphere of fairness and credibility is vital.
  • Synthesis--must be willing and able to incorporate the ideas of others into their personal strategies; synthesizing the group's best ideas and approaches into one coherent whole.
  • Decisiveness--ability to make decisions when needed and to lead through action in performance; the entire process can unravel if leaders lack these skills.

Studies show that organizations can get into trouble by becoming too dependent on one person's leadership which cannot satisfy all the groups' needs. Leaders need to be able to address such diverse but very real responsibilities as task goals, emotional stimulation, and social needs.

Are leaders born? Research struggles with this one, as it is hard to give a definitive yes or no. The answer "perhaps" is probably the best choice. Certain traits like confidence, charisma, and intelligence are more innate and less likely to be taught or learned. But certain leadership skills can be taught. At Intel managers teach other manages how to be leaders; it is part of the corporate culture.

The five steps for expanding leadership within the organization:

  1. Create a supportive environment--let workers know they will be supported provided they are doing things that can potentially benefit the company and they keep communication open (good and bad) with management.
  2. Train employees to lead and follow. Learning how to follow and be a good team player are necessary for any successful corporation.
  3. Encourage employee participation and initiative.
  4. Tear up the organizational leadership chart. Great leaders can be found anywhere in the company. Self-managing teams at Saturn consist of non-managers and they have been highly productive.
  5. Reward leadership behavior. If a company wants leadership efforts from all, then all must be rewarded when they efforts benefits the company.

There are some potential traps or pitfalls as well: